========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:31:40 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Arab crew MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf in Belgium (#2406) The names of the crew members who lost their lives in the Norwich City shipwreck are recorded in "Deaths at Sea 1929-1932" which is kept at the Public Record Office (PRO)in Kew, which is a suburb of London (UK). The names of the "Arabs" are definitely Arab names. I did further research in the records on Merchant Marine sailors kept at the PRO and found no C.R. cards were kept on the Arab crew members of the Norwich City. I did find quite a number of Arab crew members who sailed in British ships in the first half of the 20th century. Many came from Aden. I asked the staff of the PRO,who are all trained historians. The reply was that 1. their records were not complete ; 2. if the names I was looking for were not in the system there was the possibility that the Arab crew members did not sail from Britain. If they sailed from Britain they should have been registered seamen. 3. therefore the PRO historians think there is the possibility the Arabs were hired somewhere outside Britain, perhaps in Aden like so many others. This is of course different from the contends of a contemporary newspaper which published a list of lost Norwich City crew members, stating the lost Arabs all lived at an address in Wales. This problem has not yet been solved but the complete crew list is kept in the St. Johns Library in New Foundland (Canada) for reasons only the British can explain. When that list is found and studied it may reveal more information. In the meantime one should remember that then as now sailors were and are hired for single voyages. They could and can be hired anywhere to sail to anywhere, then find employ on an other ship that gets them to still another place. Today they'd be flown out to relieve a crew abroad or be flown home after a long spell at sea. In 1929 this was not yet the case. LTM (who spent quite some time in the PRO and can now find her way to the drawer where the files are kept eyes closed). ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:32:50 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: NC Documents up. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit JHam 2128 wrote: >There is no specific mention of shoes being sent to Captain Hamer's men on the island. However, Captain Swindell was apparently generous with everything else. Could this be a source of the shoe parts, or other artifacts? I'm also wondering what happened to all the tins they used. Interesting things to speculate about.< I'm not sure about the rest of the artifacts, but I wouldn't mind taking a stab at the question of the benedictine bottle...? (I'd make a bet that Captain Swindell would have sent some alcohol.... - but even more certain that the survivors would have made it their duty to empty it before they left!) LTM Janet Powell #2225 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:34:31 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Lincoln Ellsworth and Trongate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Janet >From Ric The ship was a Norwegian tanker so I think that it's a pretty safe bet that it's namesake was the same guy who flew with Byrd on his polar flights. If so it's another Twilight Zone connection for me. Ellsworth, my mother's maiden name, is my middle name. I'm supposedly related to Lincoln Ellsworth. Cue the music.> Tell us Ric..... - when they make the film of Tighar's quest, (and of course, success!), .... just how long will this film be....??? And I agree with you Dennis... - not sure how 'trivia' advances our knowledge of AE/FN mystery either, but from a family history perspective I've certainly found the assistance of those individuals, such as your good self, of great value and assistance. (And you're postings make me laugh too!) Janet Powell #2225 ************************************************************************** From Ric It will be the first film to include a lunch break. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:35:23 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Blucher boots MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King I did a quick search and found a guy who's done a history of boots. I've asked him. His history indicates that Blucher-style BOOTS came into use early in this century, and that boots generally became unpopular by the '30s. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:33:26 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: quicksand MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Ric, I really think you have to tell them about McKean.... *************************************************************************** From Ric Ahh McKean ... I can smell it now. 1989. We had gone ashore over the reef (no landing channel at McKean Island) riding the surf and slamming onto the beach like we were the 2nd Marine Division. We immediately came under heavy automatic droppings fire from the one million (count 'em) seabirds that are the island's only inhabitants. We divided our forces to recon the island and see if there was any indication of airplane wreckage. While the main group headed off for the far end, I set off alone (sheer genius) to investigate the "lagoon" which is really just huge a shin-deep pool with a bottom composed primarily of guano - Latin name: Bird Shit. Smithsonian ornithologists who had been there had assured me that the lagoon was only about 18 inches deep. True enough, but what they failed to mention and perhaps had been smart enough to avoid finding out for themselves, was that the bottom is made up of a crust of guano beneath which is a seemingly bottomless pit of the most disgusting ooze you can imagine. I was a good hundred yards out into the pool when the crust let go. I suddenly found myself up to my thighs in historic avian manure and every movement I made prompted further descent. At this point I said to myself, "Self, you have a problem." For lack of a better idea I got on the radio and called the rest of the team. "Hey guys, I'm sinking in the guano and I can't get out." "What do you expect us to do about it? We're on the other side of the island." "I guess I just wanted to let you know where to search for the body." "Okay, good luck." "Thanks." By now I'm up to my crotch. The phrase "What a way to go" does not begin to express my disappointment at the prospect of continued sinking. Time to get creative. Sitting or laying down would distribute my weight over a wider area but if my butt broke through I'd be just that much closer to the u nthinkable. I decided to compromise. I leaned way forward and supported some of my weight on my hands and gave a highly motivated heave on one leg. Sssssssmuck! Out it came. Now supporting my weight on two hands and one knee I hauled the other leg out and crawled to what seemed like a firmer spot. There I was able to stand up and make my way to the lagoon shore like a guy walking on eggshells. When I eventually caught up with the team they were ( I told myself) happy to see me but insisted that I keep my distance. They said I smelled bad. I recounted my adventure and then asked Russ Matthews, our video cameraman, to come with me. "Where we going?" "Back to the lagoon." "Are you CRAZY? You just said that you damned near died back there, and now you want to go BACK?" "Yeah, we need to document what that lagoon is like, but it's too dangerous to do alone." "Swell." Russ is a stout-hearted fellow and we succeeded in getting the documentation we needed and by very judicious selection of where we walked we only broke through a couple times and were able to help each other get unstuck. However, I can tell you that if there is airpane wreckage in the bottom of that lagoon, as far as I'm concerned, it can friggin' STAY there. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:36:25 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Ludicrous clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King For Chris Kennedy The Tridacna run (sic) about 10-17 cm. long and 6-9 cm. across -- the complete valves, that is. We found them in two "clambushes" -- fairly dense linear-oval clusters about 10 meters apart, one right on the crest of the ridge, the other a bit lower on the gentle slope to the SE. We estimated about 15 clams in each, represented by about 30 valves, but in Clambush #1, which we brought home, there were 29 identifiable individual valves representing at least 17 clams. Each clambush was/is about 70-90 cm. wide and 2.5 meters long (that's from memory, without digging out my notes). As for depth of artifacts, I don't think there's anything to be made of it. Except in the sidewall of the "skull hole," where bird and fish bones kept popping up at odd depths, virtually nothing was found more than 10 cm. deep, and in that depth range, in a "soil" matrix as loose as the coral rubble of the Seven Site, there's little point in tryint to sort out stratigraphic relationships. The only place where we were able to do this was in the vicinity of Clambush #1, where we could show that a now-decayed layer of asphalt siding from the nearby roll of the stuff had overlain a deposit of small clams (Anadara sp.) and charcoal, and that the asphalt siding role itself had been overlain by a layer of corrugated iron. One thing to keep in mind in discussing what Gallagher would and would not have seen is that we have no guarantee that the part of the site we recorded in detail was the part he was looking at -- at least when he made his telegraphic reports to the WPHC. We really don't know the full extent of the Seven Site, and what we have is one transect across it. Gallagher probably wasn't much to the northwest of us, because there the site is pretty open and seems to peter out into the bukas, but to the southeast, where it's heavily covered with Scaevola, we really don't know how far the site goes, and therefore (assuming Gallagher was viewing some part of the site) we can't say where he was relative to where we were. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:44:15 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Clams and the mysterious "g" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Darrell Houghton in West Lost Angeles, CA In the photograph of the island taken December 1, 1938, trails are observed, one of which "leads from the part of the Seven Site where the clam shells were found, through the buka forest, to a specific point on the shore of the lagoon, where there was once a clam bed." (The End Of The Trail, TIGHAR Research Bulletin) This photographic evidence narrows the time period in which the source of the clam shells could have been deposited, ie. pre-settlement. Is it possible there is some photographic evidence we can use to help identify when the mysterious "g" first appeared? I recall in the helicopter tour video the "g" was visible. Is this a job for PHOTEK? Darrell #2188 ************************************************************************* From Ric Possibly. The 1938 photo was taken at an oblique angle so we cant see the ground in that area. The earliest direct overhead shot we have was taken in April 1939 but the resolution is pretty crumby. I'll ask Jeff if he thinks there's enough there to work with. The next overhead shot we have was taken in 1985, so that's not much help. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:48:00 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading Ross D wrote: Birds would be easy to catch, cook and eat as well as being familiar (chicken). ************** Spading replies: I agree the island's birds are easy to catch. I have reservations, however, based on my experience butchering chickens and pheasants, about them being easy to first prepare and then cook. I would not characterize the process of a castaway removing the feathers and gutting them, without any conventional tools, as "easy". Taking it to the next step, and considering what you would cook them either in (do not have a pot?) or on (do not have a pan?), and the whole process seems even more difficult. Getting a fire started in the wild is also not easy. After the bird was caught...or for that matter after the castaway caught the turtle, I submit that the next steps are not easy. Yes, you could eat these items raw, but even that is not easily done without tools/knives. Our castaway ate birds and turtles...but I betcha it was not easy. Being a castaway or a lost person, either on a remote island or in say the Alaskan wilderness, is not a romantic venture. Your life will very quickly ebb away without both an intake of calories (food) and water...and depending on where you are...shelter. The critical provisions of food and water are very difficult for an inexperienced person to procure in the wild. Over time, death for the typical person, thrust into this situation, would be almost certain. In my limited experience, clams are not that bad raw. I certainly would prefer them to trying to get the feathers off of a bird, gutting it..and then eating it raw. O-k you could cook bird parts on a stick...but that assumes you have fire starting tools. Has anyone on on the Forum ever killed (shot?) a bird in the wild, prepared it and ate it? (I have only done fish) If so, what tools did you use to prepare the bird? Would it be easy without those tools? Anyway...food for thought (pun intended) as we try to sort out the castway's food situation. LTM Kenton Spading St. Paul, MN kes@mvp-wc.usace.army.mil *************************************************************************** From Ric The castaway had a fire. That much we know from Gallagher. Some of the bird bones we found were fire-blackened. Booby-on-a-stick? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:55:55 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Arab Christians MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski > From Denise > Are we absolutely certain that these Norwich City surviving "Arabs" were > either Arabs or Muslims? DOH! I forgot to even think about that as a possibility. Now that Denise mentions it, I remember being lectured by some Arab CHRISTIANS that their presence in the Holy Land pre-dates the birth of Islam. The Jews were driven out in 70 AD by the Italians, leaving Philistia in the hands of the Philistines, now known as Palestine and Palestinians, respectively. So, yes, it is a mistake to assume without proof that the Arab firemen were Muslim. Some Arabs are Christians. Marty #2359 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:57:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt the turtle was butchered > elsewhere, and perhaps partly consumed elsewhere (like the beach), with > only the shell being brought to the Seven Site. Tom, Assuming you were in our castaway's position, had a fire and managed to find a turtle, how would you propose butchering it and cooking it so that it will be edible? This isn't a trick question, just something I've done in the past without a knife, so I know how it can be done simply. I'm curious as to whether the technique is as obvious as it was to me at the time. I do have to admit that I got the technique after remembering a joke I'd heard. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:05:09 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Nauticos at sea MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric The word (via Mike Kammerer) is that Nauticos sailed from Seattle yesterday for Howland via Hawaii. They expet to begin searching sometime around March 17th. That's all I know at this time. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:05:10 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Lincoln Ellsworth MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Ric, If you haven't already, you must look at a copy of _At_The_Controls_, by Eric Long and Mark Avino. I picked up a copy from the library today. It's a Smithsonian publication, with cockpit photos of many of the aircraft in their collection. Pictures of Lincoln Ellsworth's Northrop Gamma 2B, the Polar Star, start on page 47. The Gamma has been one of my favorite airplanes for as long as I can remember, and the pictures in this book are great. ltm jon ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:06:44 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: NC documents up MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Refresh my memory - didn't we find that the heel post-dates the Norwich City wreck? ltm jon 2266 *************************************************************************** From Ric Biltrite said the heel came from a mold that was in use in the "mid-1930s". ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:16:33 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: More NC documents up MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric More Norwhich City documents are now up at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Norwich_City/NorwichCity.html ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:19:35 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Null Hypo #3: Laura & Liz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Z. From Mike Z. Okay, I was told once I have a vivid imagination. Try this one as a null hypothesis. If you're short of time, just skip to my next post. *** As teenagers from Massachusetts in the 1920's, Laura and her younger sister Liz became expert sailors, navigators, and surfboat handlers from their summers on Cape Cod and from taking several voyages with their father, a successful sea captain. Their father, alas, died unexpectedly in the summer of 1927 when a sea gull dropped a large clam on his head from high altitude. In the Spring of 1929, Laura married the rich and dashing Luke, an accomplished yachtsman in his own right. Following a romantic honeymoon yacht cruise to Bermuda and the Bahamas, Luke choked to death while enjoying an oyster dinner with Laura. A month after his death, Laura, distrustful of leveraged securities closed all her late husband's margin accounts thus saving most of the estate from the stock market crash that Fall. Liz meanwhile was having a protracted and torrid courtship with Lou. They ultimately broke up in 1933 because they couldn't agree on whether to call their entirely hypothetical first born son Leo or Larry. Two years later Laura married and Lou, and in 1936 they decided to take a cruise across the Pacific, with Liz accompanying them part of the way. Boarding her 41-foot sailing ketch Air Heart in Vancouver BC, Laura brought three bottles of her favorite Benedictine brandy, along with her old fashioned black lacquer sextant she inherited from her father who got it in Europe. Liz, not to be out done, brought her own brand new top-of-the-line brass sextant, which she could ill afford as she lived hand to mouth most of the time. The close quarters of a yacht can strain any relationship, and such was the case between Laura and Lou, and Liz and Laura, especially after a week of repeated cloudy skies and high winds, when no celestial body appeared for long. Lost and running low on fresh water, the adventure nonetheless re-ignited the passions between Lou and Liz, unbeknownst to Laura. Finally coming under clear skies early one morning, Liz draws a tentative line of position just as Laura spots an island off the port side. As Lou brings the Air Heart along the island's leeward reef, Laura and Liz note from the charts that the island may be Niku or up to two others depending on how far off course they've come. Donning her sturdy walking shoes with decidedly single tone Cats-Paw replacement heals, Laura, along with Liz, leave Lou aboard the Air Heart, taking the dinghy ashore with all their empty bottles and casks to search for water. In order to determine which island they're on, Laura also brings her sextant and one of her chronometers so she can get a noon shot of the sun without the hassle of the rocking boat. This she does high on the beach, laying her sextant in its box beside her in the shade between shots. When Liz returns to the dinghy from her futile search for water, Laura walks over to her and says, "It's definitely Gardner." Irritated that her sister couldn't find any water, Laura grabs a small empty cask and Benedictine bottle from the dinghy and heads off behind the scaveola determined to show her how it's done. She's gone a long time. Liz, on sudden evil impulse, pushes the dinghy back into the sea and rows back to the loitering Air Heart. Lou takes her on board, secures the dinghy, and, without a word, they sail away. Knowing their location and water less a problem now they've 33% less crew, they sail for Fiji. They concoct a story to tell the authorities: that Laura was swept overboard by a rogue wave while she was on deck trying to shoot a star. Thus, was born The Air Heart Conspiracy. Laura meanwhile, managed to survive the first few critical days, drinking rainwater wrung from her clothes. Caching her sextant and chronometer as best she can, but keeping the inverting eyepiece for making fires and the sextant box to carry pieces of glass she uses for tools, she makes camp down the coast underneath a ren tree. Using indigenous plant materials, she builds on the lagoon side a crude water catching device that funnels rainwater into her wooden cask. The brass chain having broken off the cask, she keeps the cork in the sextant box in case she ever has to move the cask with water in it. The Benedictine bottle becomes her canteen, rarely far from her side. Eventually she elects to explore the island more thoroughly, walking clockwise around the atoll and making it to south Aukaraime where she spends the night. Having eaten clams for dinner the night before, she ventures out on the reef in the morning foraging for something different when she slips into a crevasse, the jagged coral shredding the upper of her shoe. Back at her bivouac, she bandages several deep gashes in her instep and shin with some of her clothes, then limps back to her original camp, leaving her destroyed shoe behind. Back at her campsite, she has a man's shoe scavenged from the flotsam weeks before; it's marginally wearable. Her wounds soon become seriously infected, and she realizes that she as little time. She gathers some bits of white coral and begins to make a message that was to say "GO TO HELL, LIZ AND LOU," but only gets the "G" done before she's unable to walk to gather food, little alone coral. Weakening rapidly, she dies from blood poisoning back at her camp. In a startling coincidence on that very day, 27 nm NW of Laura's camp, Amelia Earhart's 10E runs out of fuel, having fought a strong southeast wind for the past 15 hours. The 10E cartwheels and breaks up on ditching killing Earhart and Noonan, the floating debris soon dispersed by the waves, although a few interesting bits eventually wash up on Niku. Several days after the crash, eagle-eyed Lieutenant Lambrecht spots Laura's water catcher, recognizing it as a sign of recent habitation, but no one is there to provide an answering wave to his repeated zooms. And Liz and Lou? They stayed in Fiji. In 1938, a rogue band of Japanese operatives, disguised as oyster fishermen, kidnap Liz, convinced she is Amelia Earhart and that the US Government faked her disappearance so she could be America's South Pacific superspy. She dies towards the end of WWII after the operatives move her around randomly throughout the Japanese Empire. While snorkling in 1940, Lou is swallowed by a clam of remarkable proportions. Burp. *** Did I leave anything out? --Mike Z. from Mass. **************************************************************************** From Ric We seem to have sparked an entire genre of novels. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:22:46 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Null #3 Laura & Liz: But seriously... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Z. From Mike Z. If we accept the interpretation of Gallagher and the analysis of Jantz and Burns that the castaway was a white female, and if the castaway is not Earhart, then she must be either: 1. The castaway that survived the shipwreck of a to-be-determined vessel, the wreck of which has been lost. 2. The castaway that was left on the island by a to-be-determined vessel. The Laura and Lisa story makes being left on Niku is deliberate criminal act, but I suppose I could dream up something accidental. Or it could be even intended by the castaway under a misguided notion of a tropical paradise. Of course, the point of a null hypothesis is to have something for which you can estimate its likelihood so you can decide to reject it or not. In this case I don't how to effectively test this hypothesis from examining the archaeological or historical record. But given that what we really want to do it determine if the castaway is AE (or FN), I wouldn't feel obligated to disprove every alternative hypothesis imaginable. Short of an Any Reasonable Idiot Artifact, someone is always going to be able to dream up some non-AE story that fits current data. A more profitable approach is to require that any alternative hypothesis be based on some evidence in the archaeological and historical record. For example, a worthy alternative hypothesis would be something like "It could have been castaways from the sloop Stingray which disappeared in the vicinity of Canton in 1933" (worthy, if that event was a matter of historical record). But I think chasing a vague unsupported hypothesis like, "It could have been someone abandoned on the island," will not really help us understand what happened on Niku. I believe the evaluation of the possibility of the castaway being from the Norwich City is an example of a good null hypothesis. Being linked to a specific historic event tends to guide the analysis of the data we are gathering, and, one way or another, leads to better understanding. As for Laura and Liz, I hope it was at least entertaining. --Mike Z. from Mass. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Mike. Well put. I agree entirely. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:25:02 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Tides and Such! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Denise In an earlier forum, which I've only just read, Ric says: "Yes, we collected quite a bit of tidal information but it has not yet been pulled together and analyzed." Look, have you managed to talk yet to June Knox-Mawer? I'm wondering if you aren't just "re-inventing the wheel" here. I think she did all this stuff back in the 50s when she first got to the Pacific ... and that her ditch and drift theory, coupled with the tidal information she put together from informed sources (don't you wish I'd bothered to find out "Coconut Lady's" real name?), also had Earhart, Noonan and the Electra end up at Nikumaroro. LTM (who could ditch the drift like no other!) Denise **************************************************************************** From Ric Unless she sat on the beach at Niku for several weeks and recorded the time and depth of the tidal cycles she's not going to be much help. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:27:11 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Catching Birds MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dick Pingrey Ric, As a kid I was told that catching birds was very easy. All you had to do was sprinkle salt on their tail. I spent a lot of time outside with a salt shaker when I was five years old. I don't recall catching any birds. I guess the birds hadn't heard the story. I have often wondered if that was a common folk story in the 1930s or one just my parents though up. Dick Pingrey 908C *************************************************************************** From ric Common folktale. Any bird stupid enough to let you get that close will be easy to catch. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:32:57 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Turning North MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Terry Lee Simpson Forum,Ric and Pat,hope all are well.I have read that two Army officers had over heard messages from Earhart saying she was turning north on the LOP and the radio messages got fainter and fainter the farther she went till they heard her say she was running out gas.Suppose to be DOCUMENTED ,an inter-office memo written by an Intelligence officer,Colonel H.H.C. Richards an Air Liaison Officer in Australia too the Assistant Chief for Intelligence at the War Department in Washington D.C.I was wondering if you ever followed up on this and what your thoughts are.I've heard you on the Forum say ,you have no idea if they went right or left on the LOP.Sencerly Terry Lee Simpson(#2396) Port Huron Mi.(LTM) **************************************************************************** From Ric Dead horse. There was such a memo but the allegation is entirely unsupported and is contradicted by more contemporaneous sources (i.e. the Itasca radio logs). The memo seems to be nothing more than a early version of the kind of urban legends that now get spread on the internet. An Army rumor? Ever been in the Army? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:44:02 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Nit picking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Suzanne: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dennis O. McGee #0149EC wrote: OK, gang, this is the good old U S of A, so let's stick to American English spellings if you're from the USA. [snip] LTM, who labours to spell well ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The whole thing was a JOKE because look how Dennis ended with the UK "labours". Y'all fell for it! How about this idea? A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iears ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld. Mark Twain (1835-1910) American writer ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:51:43 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Strontium 90 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon <> That is correct. Is this type of turtle the source of "tortoise shell", and does it have any commercial value? Maybe you have a poacher's site. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR# 2263 *********************************************************************** From Ric Dunno, but if so he's a pretty paltry poacher. One lousy turtle. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:53:11 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Rats MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon This site says "carnivores" are haram: It also says that reptiles are Haram (forbidden), and turtles are reptiles. I wonder if you could argue that sea turtles have scales and live in water, so they are really "fish", at least for dietary purposes. I think green sea turtles eat algae, at least the ones I saw in Hawaii were eating it. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:55:28 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Intersting scrapbook MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From unsigned Hi, I was cruising eBay for AE related readings and stumbled across this: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1518267004 It is a sailor's leather-bound handmade scrapbook from the USS Idaho. What makes this interesting is that there is some info and a map detailing the search and ships used in the AE search. It's too expensive for me to bid on, but I thought it might be a good piece of history (and information) for someone with a bigger budget then me. I've cut and pasted the Earhart related part of the description from the auction listing below. There's also some sample pictures in the listing. LTM, Darrell Whitbeck (who wants to become an official TIGHAR member one day) ........The most interesting is a map: SEARCH FOR EARHART-NOONAN PLANE, JULY 2-16. Obviously taken from the ships charts, is shows the trip from San Francisco to Hawaii to the search area. Listed are the ships: Itasca, Swan, Colorado and the Destroyers Cushing, Lanson and Drayton. Islands are: Howland, Gardner, Canton, Hull, Birnie, Phoenix, Enderbury, Carondlete Reef and perhaps others. Comments include: 0900 -12 July refueling destroyers; catapulted 3 planes 1420-7 July; recovered planes 1700-7 July; Winslow Reef, discovered 1851, charted, not sighted; sighted shacks left by solar eclipse observers June, 1937; zoomed planes, coconut groves, 3 shacks no one there; HULL I. landed planes tropical vegetation, 300 natives, 1 white man and several other comments. An incredible document of contemporary events, while searching for the world's most famous woman pilot. This map maybe published in some book somewhere, but this is a copy right from one of the ships that searched for Amelia Earhart. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:56:54 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Blucher boots MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Cameron Kippen, the Australian (naturally) boot expert, has replied to my inquiry as follows. I had asked if he could tell me when Blucher-style oxford shoes were first manufactured for women. May take me some time to track it down but will have a go. The style was around in Victorian times and the probability is there would have been women's shoes available before 1920. A common custom was to celebrate the heroes of the age and hence Wellington and Blutcher styles were popular from the late 19th century. The former was certainly worn by both sexes. The desire of liberated females to experience outdoor activities would also lend credence to the need for robust footwear. This would include the Blutcher style. Early century liberty would peak in twenties with the flappers and I would surprised if the Blutcher styles were not available for women. I cannot say however with any exactness who made a blutcher style shoe or when it first appeared, but I will try to track this information for you. --- So, preliminarily, it looks like there could have been a Blucher oxford aboard one of the NC rescue ships, or aboard the NC herself, for that matter. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:57:44 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: The Gulf of Guano MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Ric said: "They said I smelled bad. I recounted my adventure and then asked Russ Matthews, our video cameraman, to come with me." Let's see, we got the Everly Brother, the Blues Brothers, the Christian Brothers, the McKenzie Brothers, and the Isley Brothers. Now we got the Guano Brothers. Oh, brother! LTM, who is brotherless Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:59:38 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: quicksand MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Holt > However, I can tell you that if there is airpane wreckage in the bottom of > that lagoon, as far as I'm concerned, it can friggin' STAY there. Wow. All that having been said, if one wanted to search for wreckage in the guano, is there any way to do that other than to pump the ... stuff ... out? Just curious. Mike **************************************************************************** From Ric I don't know how you'd even do that. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:00:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Ludicrous clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy Thanks. I agree with you that we shouldn't make conclusions that Gallagher saw something we saw (e.g. the turtle/bird bones) or missed seeing something we saw (the clams/oysters) at least until we know where he was relative to where we were. It's also unfortunate about the problems encountered at the Site with trying to date artifacts based on depth found. We'll need to keep this in mind in future discussions. --Chris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:01:32 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King I haven't killed and prepared a bird in the wild, but I grew up on a chicken ranch where every month or so we'd have major kill-a-thons of the hens who'd gone past their laying prime and were destined for the fricassee pot. The de-feathering was a serious enterprise, involving immersion in boiling water to loosen them (the feathers) up, and then a lot of tedious plucking. I think Kenton's right; the catching would be easy but the preparation would be something else again. Boobie on a stick is a possibility, but I'll bet that Boobies are tough old birds. I know, castaways can't be choosers. It may be worth noting that we really don't have very many bird bones in the Seven Site assemblage. There's the big concentration on the surface near the tank, first observed (by TIGHAR) in 1996 and collected in 2001, but in the excavated burn features bird bones were pretty sparce. I'm hoping to have a report soon on the identification of all the specimens. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:03:23 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric & Kenton, Don't forget, we have the pieces of glass that may have been used as cutting implements - if I was in that situation, I might not bother to pluck the little critter, I might just use my sharp glass shard to skin it. Once skinned, the entrails would be easily removed, and then I'd spit it and cook it over the fire. ltm jon 2266 *************************************************************************** From Ric As far as I know, ll of those birds live on fish. I'll bet they taste NASTY. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:05:59 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: No Subject MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, It would only be significant if the G is NOT present in the 1985 picture. Probably worth at least a look. ltm jon 2266 *************************************************************************** From Ric The shadows in the 1985 photos make it very hard to tell. Now, if the G was present in the 1939 photo that WOULD be interesting because the date (April 30, 1939) predates any known activity on that part of the island. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:07:08 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Re: I do have to admit that I got the technique after remembering a joke I'd heard. OK, Wombat, you've got me hooked. What's the technique? I'll confess that I haven't given the matter much thought at all. I've never tried to butcher a turtle, and now that you mention it don't have much idea how I'd go about it. Stave in its tummy, I suppose, and then hack off the meaty parts as best I could with my broken glass float. But what's the joke? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:10:40 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy Kenton's point is good Ric---extrapolating from what Tom said, I think it's fair to say that until we know where we were relative to Gallagher, we can't say that the bones/fire he found and that we found are the same. Wasn't the fire pit on Aukeraime dated, by the can label, to the 1970s? All fires are charred remnants aren't castaway fires and remnants. --Chris *************************************************************************** From Ric How would you suggest that we decide whether or not we're at the castaway campsite found by Gallagher? What would satisfy you? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:17:42 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Bauareke Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee I was looking at gridded 18X24 color pix of Niku many of us used to follow the Niku IIII expedition and noticed an anomaly down by Bauareke Passage. On either side of the passage there are many large open gray areas, which I assumed to be shale or a shale-like substance, mixed with the green vegetation. The open gray areas are most pronounced on the west side of the passage though they extend for several thousand feet eastward toward the Loran station.. What I found odd was that opposite the gray areas, extending for 300-400 yards out into the ocean, the sea water appears cloudy and brown. This "phenomena" seems most pronounced at Bauareke, though it occurs in lesser degrees elsewhere on the island including the area near the Loran station. I assumed the brown cloudy water was the result of something eroding from the island and washing out to the sea. But if you look at the pattern of the eroded material it doesn't fan out as one might expect it to. Rather the material goes in fairly straight lines, leaving several small pools of undisturbed and clear seawater. Any idea of what is going on around Bauareke Passage? LTM, who's past is cloudy and brown Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric The reef flat does look a bit different there. I suspect that what you're seeing are simply depressions in the reef flat where the water is deeper. The brown areas are only inches deep in water so you're seeing the reef surface. The bluish-green areas are where the water is deper so you're seeing water. It would probably make more sense to you if you saw the video. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:22:30 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Fixin birds MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From L. Turner Getting a bird ready to cook is real simple just peel out the breast and throw away skin, feathers and stuff. Small birds such a doves are easy, just put thumb in neck at wish bone and rotate out the breast out leaving all other parts connected together. Put on stick and roast. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:35:33 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Twilight Zone MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Kenton Spading, 1382CE Ric wrote: The ship was a Norwegian tanker so I think that it's a pretty safe bet that it's namesake was the same guy who flew with Byrd on his polar flights. If so it's another Twilight Zone connection for me. Ellsworth, my mother's maiden name, is my middle name. I'm supposedly related to Lincoln Ellsworth. Cue the music. ********* Spading replies: It is time for a full disclosure on this issue. Perhaps even a link to a page on the website with the full list. So far I count three worm hole connections between Ric/TIGHAR and the Earhart saga. 1. Ric lives just off of Arundel Drive. Arundel planted cocos on Niku. 2. I seem to remember some sort of a Gallagher connection? 3. Ric's middle name is Ellsworth (his mother's maiden name). The Lincoln Ellsworth rescued the Norwich City sailors from Niku. I believe there may even be some Midnight Ghost connections? I demand the full story :). LTM Kenton Spading *************************************************************************** From Ric It's worse than you imagine. 1. Yes, I live in a housing development called Arundel. 2. I am related to Joshua Coffin, master of the Nantucket whaler "Ganges", who named Gardner Island in 1825 after the ship's owner Congressman Gideon Gardner who was probably also Joshua's father-in-law (his wife was a Gardner) so I'm probably related to Gardner too. 3. I'm almost certainly related to Dr. Duncan "Jock" MacPherson. All MacPhersons descend from the 13th century Gaelic warlord Gilliechattan Mor Gillespick (or Gillespec or Ghilleaspuig) now Anglicized as Gillespie. MacPherson was from Oban, Scotland. My people originally came from just north of there. 4. I'm related on my mother's side to Lincoln Ellsworth, for whom the Norwegian tanker which helped in the Norwich City rescue was probably named. I know it sounds spooky but, in reality, many forum subscribers probably have as many connections to some of the many personalities associated with this mystery. I am not, as far as I know, related in any way to Amelia Earhart. LTM Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:34:54 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: No NC crew left behind MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kerry Tiller > From Ric > > I hope that the Norwich city documents will satisfy everyone that Captain > Hamer fulfilled his responsibilities to the fullest and, in fact, put himself > at risk in trying to launch the port side lifeboat only to be swept > overboard. It's a wonder he survived. > > It's also clear that all hands were assembled and loaded into the starboard > boat. I don't see that a case can be made for anyone being left aboard the > ship. > > LTM, > Ric Nope. Ric, it is certainly not my intention to besmirch the name of Daniel Hamer. That would serve no purpose. I'm only interested in knowing if the missing crewmen (who are not mentioned at all by either the Master nor the Second Officer in the documents you present) survived the wreck and could therefore account for our castaway(s). It is NOT clear that all hands were assembled and loaded into the starboard boat. The starboard boat was away when the Captain (in his account), by this time was washed overboard "called out for someone to lower a rope over the side." Not all the survivors had gotten into the starboard boat. But that is not the part that bothers me. In Hamer's account of his actions immediately following the the grounding, he says nothing of ordering the fires under the boilers dampened or the water tight doors closed. I don't think he made those orders, because he didn't think the damage was severe enough to warrant it. He was concerned with the difficulty of abandoning the ship at night in a storm (rightfully so; he was forced to attempt it and lost three lives). So, he left at least one boiler fire going and the auxiliary plant running to provide electricity for lights through the night with the idea to abandon ship in the morning. This would also mean a watch would have to be maintained in the main spaces. I find it very telling that the Master says (after implying all hands were topside): "Shortly after 4a.m. smoke was seen issuing from the engine room and in less time than it takes to tell the engine room, stoke holds and number three hold burst into flames." Who was he telling in the engine room if all hands were topside? I also find the cavalier attitude of Second Officer Lott who claimed to have discovered the smoke, pretty unbelievable. This was not a cruise ship with passengers whom you would not want to unnecessarily alarm. If Lott is to be believed, he QUIETLY (from whom was keeping the secret?) told the engineers there was smoke coming from the main space. The engineers went to investigate, came back and said "yup, we're on fire" [I paraphrased there], so the captain decided to abandon ship. With no attempt to put the fires out? Well, maybe not, because the fire spread so fast, he admits he didn't have time to tell the poor bastards on watch who were down there. I think what the Master and the Second Officer DO NOT say, speaks volumes. Do we have any accounts of the Ordinary Seaman who survived? These documents have not convinced me no NC crewmen were left on board. I stand on my hypothesis that the missing NC crewmen never made it out of the engine room/fire room. LTM **************************************************************************** From Ric I beg to differ. A timeline of events may help clear this up. 23:05 ship strikes reef (Lott) 23:30? Lott has had time to find the Captain and inspect the holds and then "Orders were then given for EVERYBODY (my emphasis) to stay round the galley and not to go forward of the funnell." (Lott) 04:05? Fire breaks out. "Shortly after 4 a.m. smoke was seen issuing from the engine room and in less time than it takes to tell the engine room, stokeholds and number three hold burst into flames." (Hamer) "After a considerable time I noticed smoke coming from the fiddley. I looked down in No. 3 and I could just see flames down below." (Lott) These guys have been assembled around the galley for FOUR HOURS loading the lifeboats, sending distress calls on the wireless, while Hamer and the officers were "sounding around the ship to determine her exact position" (Hamer) and waiting for daylight before abandoning ship. 04:15? At Hamer's order the starboard (lees side) lifeboat is lowered down to the level of the gunwale. 04:30 Captain Hamer, Chief Officer Gibson, (and apparently Lott) go around to the port side to lower the port boat with the intention of towing it around to the starboard (lee) side, but as the boat was being lowered a huge wave hit, bent the davit, and washed the captain overboard. "I was swept out clear of the ship about 50 yards by the backwash from the seas. I called out for someone to lower a rope over the side. They heard me twice and then lost sight of me and gave me up for lost." (Hamer) 05:30 ? "She started exploding down below. Daylight was just about breaking then so the mate gave orders to take to the boats. Everybody got into the boat and when we had all settled down and were ready we let go the lines." (Lott) If daylight was "just about breaking" it couldn't have been much earlier that 05:30, and again, "EVERYBODY got into the boat." Hamer, who was already in the water but certainly received a report later, says, "When the lifeboat WITH ALL HANDS (my emphasis) was leaving the ship it... capsized throwing most of the crew into the sea, eleven of them losing their lives. Four were imprisoned under the boat, one of them was found drowned..." You say that Hamer "... admits he didn't have time to tell the poor bastards on watch who were down there." Where does he say that? By the time the fire is detected everybody has been assembled around the galley for four hours. You say: <> This is conjecture. Nobody says that. Clearly there was electricity for the sending of distress calls so there must have been a power source operating, but the ship was already judged to be a total wreck before the fire was d etected. You also say: <> There's a comma fault there that is leading you astray. Hamer is saying, " In less time than it takes to tell, the engine room, stoke holds and number three hold burst into flames." Given the four hours between the grounding and the detection of fire, during which preparations were made to abandon ship, and the hour or so between the time the captain went over the side and the lowering of the starboard boat, and the repeated statements that clearly imply that everyone was present on deck and later in the boat, I can see no way of supporting any contention that anyone was left aboard. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:36:17 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Katz > < it and ate it? (I have only done fish) If so, what tools did you use to > prepare the > bird? Would it be easy without those tools?>> Yeah, as part of a Boy Scout survival trip when I was 15 -- snared a pheasant using twine and a trap constructed of small, thin branches; killed it, gutted it & cleaned it with my Boy Scout knife, and roasted it on a carved wooden spit. Very tasty. I had several things going for me though: * the scoutmaster and his assistant had pre-identified a locale where pheasant (and other game) were plentiful; * pheasant are, apparently, fairly stupid; * there were several of us who, together, were able to conceive of a good snare (don't ask me to remember exactly how it worked -- I don't know if I could replicate it today); * my father was a butcher, and I had seen him clean fowl many, many times, so I was familiar with the process. Cleaning the feathers was a pain in the butt. We pulled out the big feathers by hand and then scraped the skin raw with the knife. Afterward, we seared the outside of the flesh over the fire to remove the little stubs (I had seen my dad do this over an open flame). We were the only group (of four) who trapped a pheasant. Most of the others caught fish or frogs; one group caught a wild rabbit. Overall, an interesting experience, but not one I would like to replicate. David Katz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:41:39 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski > ... Being a castaway or a lost person, either on a remote island or in say the > Alaskan wilderness, is not a romantic venture. Your life will very quickly > ebb away without both an intake of calories (food) and water...and > depending on where you are...shelter. ... I read a very sad book, _Into the Wild_, by Jon Krakauer, about a lad who died alone in the Alaskan wilderness because he failed to preserve the meat from a caribou he shot, because he didn't provide himself with a map (which would have shown him how to cross a swollen river), and (probably) because he ate some plants that are only non-poisonous part of the year. He exiled himself on purpose, but tried to save himself once he started suffering from food poisoning. Another man died in isolation in Alaska because, having failed to make arrangements to be picked up, and after losing some ammo and provisions through a break in the ice, he gave the wrong signal when a bush plane flew low over his dock. He waved, "I'm OK. You don't have to worry about me" instead of "Please land and save me." The proper signals were printed on the reverse of his hunting permit. An Army survival manual for Alaskan service, circa 1910 (if I remember correctly), warns against trying to survive on rabbit meat alone. Rabbits have too little fat to sustain humans over the long run. The castaway on Niku apparently lived long enough to kill birds, clams, and a turtle; but did not have the skills to survive until the PISS colonists could come to the rescue. Something caught up with that person: hunger, thirst, fatigue, despair, infection, exposure or some other catastrophe. LTM. Marty #2359 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:42:59 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Arab crew MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Phil Tanner > This is of course different from the contents of a contemporary newspaper > which published a list of lost Norwich City crew members, stating the lost > Arabs all lived at an address in Wales.>> I was brought up in South Wales, between the two main ports, Cardiff and Newport, and both have long-standing minority communities around the docks brought to the area by links to merchant shipping - Somalis in Cardiff in particular, also Yemenis, no doubt others. When I was a teenager I had a Saturday job helping deliver bread from a van, and I well remember a sailors' boarding house in Newport run by a formidable Mrs Nasser, who I believe was a Yemeni. When you stepped through the door you immediately slipped several thousand miles eastwards. This was around 1970-71 and the ports have declined since and the communities have blended more, and no doubt in the 30s they were much larger and held more closely to their own traditions. So no contradiction at all in sailors identifying themselves as Arabs shipping out of a Welsh port. LTM Phil Tanner 2276 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:44:00 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon I have skinned ruffed grouse, instead of plucking them. They are fairly dry, even if roasted with the skin. They can be gutted with a fairly dull pocketknife, and I wouldn't be surprised if you could do this with your bare hands. The certainly can be skinned with your bare hands alone, as I have done it. It shouldn't be much tougher than cleaning fish. I haven't cooked any in the open, but I suppose you could roast them on a spit, or cook them on a stick like hot dogs. I suspect they would be fairly tough to chew. Dan Postellon TIGHAR#2263 LTM (Who prefers pheasant.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:44:59 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf in Belgium (#2406) Military pilots today follow a survival course. That includes learning techniques to live off the land after having ejected behind enemy lines, catch and kill animals including chicken, roast, cook or bake them, etc. Amelia Earhart never followed such a course and never had the training. Neither did Fred Noonan. How can one assume today, 64 year after 1937, that living in an other era they succeeded in catching birds, fish and other animals and survive on Gardner Island ? I know how difficult it is to catch a bird, no matter what Ric says. I have a feeling that if the two got marooned on Gardner Island they lacked even elementary knowledge of how to survive and were probably even unable to catch a bird. Even if the did they may not even have known how to cook it. They were complete dudes. If they had been members of the Boy Scout of Girl Scout movement they might have learned the tricks of how to use a map, find the North and try to get to some civilized part of the world, even to light a fire with two sticks of wood, but not how to catch animals, slaughter them and cook them. As far as one knows neither AE or FN ever were boy or girl scouts and if they ever had been, by 1937 would never acquired the skills to survive on Gardner by living off the land. Those who can today are called SAS (Special Air Service) troops. LTM (who believes it takes animal skills to survive) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:46:33 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: quicksand MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mark Cameron I grew up watching Mitchner's "Adventures in Paradise". All Pacific Islands are balmy and inhabited by beautiful naked women. Nothing ever mentioned about knee-deep guano. Was I mis-informed? ************************************************************************** From Ric I'm still looking for those islands. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:47:20 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Off Topic - Lady Mary Bailey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ric, A friend has just bought a flying helmet reputed to have belonged to Lady Mary Bailey, the early aviation pioneer (born1910 died 1960) and daughter of Lord Rosslare of county Monaghan. I wondered if anyone on the forum had knowledge of any futher useful sources of information or any photographs of her in her flying helmet. Regards Angus ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:56:04 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Null #3 Laura & Liz: But seriously... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Katz > Mike Z said (in part): > > "If we accept the interpretation of Gallagher and the analysis of Jantz and > Burns that the castaway was a white female, and if the castaway is not > Earhart, then she must be either: > > 1. The castaway that survived the shipwreck of a to-be-determined vessel, > the wreck of which has been lost. > > 2. The castaway that was left on the island by a to-be-determined vessel." Mike, The weakness in saying that "if the castaway is not Earhart, then SHE must be..." is that a careful reading of the Burns/Jantz analysis does not, in fact, conclude that the bones belonged to a white female. Rather, the report states: "The skull is more likely European than Polynesian, although it cannot be excluded from any population." Burns and Jantz are qualifying their conclusion, as they should in light of the fact that they do not have the actual bones to analyze. The report goes on to say, "Assuming the skull represents a person of European ancestry, the FORDISC analysis indicates that the individual represented was most likely female. Unfortunately the level of certainty is very low..." Note the premise of the assumption: they are stating that the person was "most likely female" ONLY if their previous assumption (i.e., that the skull is European rather than Polynesian) proves to be correct. They go on to say that "the level of certainty is very low" (and they quantify their level of probability). Because Burns and Jantz have specifically stated that the skull "cannot be excluded from any population" and they opine that it is female ONLY IF one ASSUMES European ancestry, one cannot eliminate the possibility that the bones belonged to some other party -- perhaps a Polynesian or one of the Norwich City crew members. The TIGHAR web site carefully states: "It is, of course, impossible to know whether the bones inspected by Dr. Hoodless in 1941 were in fact those of a white female, and if anything even less possible to be sure that they were those of Amelia Earhart. Only the rediscovery of the bones themselves, or the recovery of more bones from the same skeleton on the island, can bring certainty." By the way, I found the tale of Lou, Liz and Laura to be very entertaining, and I agree with your statement, "But I think chasing a vague unsupported hypothesis like, 'It could have been someone abandoned on the island,' will not really help us understand what happened on Niku." Very true indeed. However, it also does little to help advance what happened on Niku to draw conclusions from highly qualified reports such as the Burns/Jantz analysis. One of the apparent tenets of TIGHAR is to analyze the totality of all the gathered evidence (by "evidence" I include all clues/anecdotal reports, artifacts, etc.) and endeavor to see if they fit the hypothesis that Earhart made it to Gardner Island in 1937. When analyzing such evidence, it is important to examine REASONABLE alternative explanations for the presence of each item. Clearly, as you have so entertainingly pointed out, one can construct any fictional scenario to account for all the evidence; however, one need not to resort to fiction for alternative explanations for the evidence. There remains the possibility that the presence of the Norwich City crewmen on Gardner, the Coast Guard personnel, British administrators and the settlers could account for some (or all) of the evidence. The challenge of TIGHAR is to eliminate these other possibilities conclusively. David Katz ************************************************************************** From Ric I trust that we're not going to have go through this "but Burns and Jantz said..." thing again. Yes, like the good scientists that they are they qualified their statements with many cautions but at the end of the day, based upon the information available, the scales tipped in favor of a white Norse female. We accept that for what it is. An indication. Another itty-bitty clue that we may be on the right track. We're never going to prove that the castaway was Earhart by eliminating all the other people it could be. The Burns/Jantz conclusions about the bones tell us that further investigation on the island is warranted. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:58:16 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Noticing Clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Andrew McKenna Th' WOMBAT writes: << if there were clam shells there and they were visible I would have thought Gallagher would mention them. >> Keep in mind that the clams were not immediately in the area of the fish, bird, and turtle bones, but were about 10 meters away. Gallagher may not have realized at first glance that they were possibly related. I don't think we did. Andrew McKenna ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 12:59:42 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Twilight Zone MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Katz The truth has, at last, come to light! Ric, you are clearly engaged in a conspiracy to promote real estate development on Gardner Island for the profit of your family. Hence all the trips there (to demonstrate how easy the commute would be). Fess up. David Katz :-) **************************************************************************** From Ric I guess the jig is up. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 13:57:45 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: News from Ludolph MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric I received a phone call this morning from a senior executive at the Ludolph company in Bremerhaven, Germany. Over a month ago I had written to the company asking if they had any information that might help us identify any of our artifacts but, as it turns out, only three people in upper management speak English so the email floated around for quite a while until it reached someone who could read it. It was worth the wait. Nothing conclusive yet, but there are several new pieces of information which seem to support the hypothesis that the sextant box found by Gallagher was for a Ludolph sextant. 1) The numbers on the box - 3500 (stencilled) and 1542. Most of the Ludolph company records were destroyed when the factory was bombed during the Second World War. Post-war production did not resume until 1952 but the first instrument serial number entered in the new record was 3562. It is not certain that the instrument was a sextant because only the date - November 3, 1952 - and the serial number are recorded. However, it stands to reason that if Ludolph produced an instrument in 1952 with the serial number 3562, then at some earlier date they produced an instrument serialed 3547 (the number written on the Pensacola box once owned by Fred Noonan) and 3500 (the number stencilled on the box found by Galllagher). Of course, the implication would be that only 15 sextants of that particular model had been produced between, at the latest, 1937 (when Noonan acquired 3547) and 1952. I asked if that sounded reasonable and was told. "Yes. Sextants were never produced by Ludolph in great numbers, being very high-end precision instruments; but when Hitler came to power the factory ceased sextant production entirely and turned to making compasses and other instruments for the Luftwaffe under a military serial number system." Very few pre-war records remain, but one book that has drawings of component parts of sextants (for example: inverting eyepieces) shows that they had their own serial numbers - four digits beginning with the numeral 1. 2. Artifact 2-6-S-45, "the knob" The theoretical reconstruction of the artifact shown on the home page of the TIGHAR website bears a strong resemblance to the "adjustment drum" on Ludolph sextants, including the raised figures on the face which designate various setting positions. On early sextants the drum was made of ivory and on post-war sextants they are plastic. What they were made of in the early 20th century is not known. 3. Artifacts 2-6-S-03a & 03b, "the fasteners" These bear a resemblance to fasteners used on some Ludolph sextant boxes. The company has mailed me several photos illustrating the above points. Also, 4. It is common for the serial number of Ludoph sextants to be written on the outside of the box. 5. All Ludolph sextants are painted in black enamel. The Ludolph company will continue to research our questions and help us any way they can, as time permits. Their website is at www.ludolph.de LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:26:10 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Tides and Such! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King For Denise Murphy No, we haven't been able to contact Knox-Mawer (who, for the uninitiated, wrote "The Shadow of Wings," a novel in which Earhart crashes near Niku, crawls ashore and survives a few days (losing a shoe) but becomes amnesiac, is picked up by a British colonial officer who keeps her as a sex slave...). As you know, she used to work for BBC but has retired. We tracked down the addresses of two women with likely names in Wales (where she'd long lived according to book jacket blurbs), and I wrote them both, but got no response. Efforts have also been made to reach her by phone, but to no avail. The reason we're so interested is not her possible observations on tides, but some cryptic remarks in the introduction to "The Shadow..." about being motivated to write the book not only by TIGHAR's discoveries in '89 and '91, but by some kind of information received from another source. We'd like to know the source, and the nature of the information. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:28:35 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Remember nuoc mam? Did I spell that right? Anyway, nasty is probably better than starving... ltm, jon ************************************************************************** From Ric Yes, I remember. No, I'm not sure know how to spell it. And I'm not at all sure that it's better than starving. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:29:19 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Strontium 90 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Re. the type of turtle: we're not entirely sure yet, but DNA analysis is underway and we should have results soon. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:30:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: quicksand MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King For Mike: We (not Ric; he didn't wanna talk about it) talked about how we'd "dig" the McKean "lagoon" if we really thought that Earhart was down there, and concluded that it could probably be done only with a very expensive cofferdam arrangement and lots of pumps, and since the island is an environmentally sensitive bird sanctuary, there's really no way. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:33:02 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Birds, easy to cook MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Muenich I think we are examing the "receipe" for cooked birds from the wrong perspective, the comfort of our homes and full bellies. Captain Bligh, of Bounty fame, sailed 1,000 miles plus to Timor after the mutiny. They had no fires. They ate raw fish & raw birds to survive. Military personel are trained to eat things raw to survive, things you or I would step on. If this castaway was hungry, he or she would eat, whatever and however. It would bash the clams with a rock, beat them against a tree or pry them open with anything at hand, then eat them raw. It would grab the birds, wring their necks, pluck out most of the feathers and eat them raw. If it had a fire, so much the better. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:34:18 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Catching Birds MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf in Belgium (#2406) For Dick, It wasn't a story your parents thought up. I live across the Atlantic and the same story is told over here. The lesson is that if you can get near enough to a bird to put salt on its tail you are be able to grab it. As we all know the problem with birds is they don't wait for the salt... I heard the story from my father who was born in 1903. He heard it from his father who was born in 1875... As far as I am aware of none of my family ever migrated back from the US to Belgium. So chances are the story was invented in Europe and came to the US with European settlers who continued to tell it to their children. LTM (who was never quick enough to catch a bird with salt) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:36:19 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >From Dave Bush in Houston, Texas: Herman: Just because a bunch of city raised boys in the modern era don't know how to skin a rabbit doesn't mean that those raised in other era's or even other parts of the world, don't know how to skin them. In AE's "era" there weren't nearly as many butcher shops as today, and many people, even living in small to midsize towns, raised their own chickens for both the eggs and the meat, and thus knew how to prepare the chicken (being politically correct, I used the term "prepare" rather than describing the process wherein one grabs the chicken by the head and deftly swings them around, breaking their neck, then removes the ... oh, but I am being un-pc again, sorry). But, truly, you didn't have to join the Scouts or take courses to learn such things, unless you were raised by those who didn't know how, or had the means by which they didn't have to do it any longer and didn't bother to pass the skill on to their unfortunate off-spring. LTM - who knows how to prepare a lot of things, Dave Bush In reply to From Herman De Wulf in Belgium (#2406) > >Military pilots today follow a survival course. That includes learning >techniques to live off the land after having ejected behind enemy lines, catch and kill animals including chicken, roast, cook or bake them, etc. Amelia Earhart never followed such a course and never had the training. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:43:59 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Null #3 Laura & Liz: But seriously... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Katz > I trust that we're not going to have go through this "but Burns and Jantz > said..." thing again. Yes, like the good scientists that they are they > qualified their statements with many cautions but at the end of the day, > based upon the information available, the scales tipped in favor of a white > Norse female. We accept that for what it is. Actually, you have emphasized my point. My concern is that many postings on the forum seem to take it for granted that the bones were, in fact, those of a European female, when the level of certainty, in Burns's and Jantz's own words, was quite low. I do not interpret their statement to "tip the scales." Rather, it appears to me that the issue is still in doubt. David Katz ************************************************************************* From Ric If Burns and Jantz had decided that no meaningful opinion could be offered given the information available I feel confident that they would have said so. However, they DID offer an opinion, albeit with suitable cautions. Of course the issue is still in doubt, but the scales came down on the side of white norse female. You don't seem to be able to accept any piece of information as useful unless it is smoking gun conclusive. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:54:03 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Time to Howland MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy Do we have any information as to how long (hours) the flight thought it would take to reach Howland from Lae? --Chris Kennedy ************************************************************************* From Ric The original estimate (prepared back in the States before the trip) was 17 hours and 1 minute. That appears to be simply the distance - 2, 556 statute miles - divided by the airplane's economical cruising speed - 150 mph. At the time of departure, Earhart apparently expected the flight to take 18 hours (based upon a message sent from Lae to Itasca annoncing Earhart's takeoff). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:56:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Autopsies/Forensics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy I believe there were some doctors on the Forum who said earlier that they had performed both autopsies on "fleshed" remains and also forensics work on "unfleshed" bones. In other words, notwithstanding different techniques employed, they (one doctor) had performed both. Is this correct? --Chris Kennedy ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:56:54 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Reef.... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Roger Kelley From: Roger Kelley The reef surrounding Nikumaroro Island and the two passages providing access to the interior lagoon, have been the subject of forum discussion on occasion. One can gain insight into the interaction between the reef, Tatiman and Bauareke Passages, the sea and the lagoon by viewing the Aerial Tour video. However, there are no low altitude, high quality, color aerial photographs of Niku's reef that I'm aware of. While "surfing" for information on Central and South Pacific reef's I discovered a splendid photograph of the reef at Palmyra Island at www.janeresture.com/palmyra/index.htm . There are eleven photographs on this particular web page. The subject photograph is number six from the top. The photograph accurately depicts "canyons" carved from the outer reef, the flow of waters over the reef into the lagoon, and the direction and extent of sand deposits inside the lagoon. Would Niku Expedition members care to comment on the similarities of the Palmyra reef depicted and the reef at Niku? LTM, Roger Kelley ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:02:24 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski > From Herman De Wulf in Belgium (#2406) > ... I know how difficult it is > to catch a bird, no matter what Ric says. It is, in my view, not reasonable to doubt Ric's word about bird behavior on Niku. The truth of what he says, even though it is only testimony on the internet, is substantiated by others who have been on Niku and by the story of the dodo, a bird species from Mauritius that went extinct, in part, because they had no innate fear of humans and other predators: . There is also the evidence of the bird bones, seen by Gallagher and (presumably) found again by Niku IIII. Despite what you think about the difficulties of catching birds, the Niku castaway seems to have caught 'em, cooked 'em, and (one supposes) et 'em. I make different assumptions from you about Ric's assessment of bird behavior and about what AE and FN may have been capable of when they got sufficiently hungry. My assumptions, of course, are not evidence; but neither are yours. I am not willing to believe everything Ric says, but I am not willing to doubt everything, either. The alternative to trusting him and his methods (apart from walking on guano & quicksand) is to raise my own funds, train in archeology, and go to Niku myself. Perish the thought. LTM. Marty #2359 *************************************************************************** From Ric There is actually a photo of me holding a baby booby. I, of course, put it back but his Mom followed me around and gave me hell for about ten minutes. (Lest I get a call from the Attorney General, the above reference is to a juvenile seabird.) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:05:44 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Noticing Clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Andrew says: Gallagher may not have realized at first glance that they were possibly related. I don't think we did. That's true. When I first saw them under the scaevola, I wasn't sure whether they were "cultural" shells -- i.e., deposited there by people, or natural, something that had uplifted with the island. It wasn't until we cleared them and looked at them with a degree of care that it became obvious that they hadn't gotten there naturally. It's also notable that they weren't noted in 1996, though the team must have hacked their way right past at least Clambush #1. *************************************************************************** From Ric Absolutely correct. We noticed all kinds of things in '96 - even something as tiny as a button - but never noticed the clams. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:07:11 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon > >From Ric > > As far as I know, ll of those birds live on fish. I'll bet they taste NASTY. All the more reason to skin them. Most of the fishy taste would be in the fat under the skin. Dan Postellon#2263 *************************************************************************** From Ric Ya learn somethin' every day. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:09:24 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt > From Tom King > OK, Wombat, you've got me hooked. What's the technique? I'll confess that > I haven't given the matter much thought at all. I've never tried to > butcher a turtle, and now that you mention it don't have much idea how I'd > go about it. Stave in its tummy, I suppose, and then hack off the meaty > parts as best I could with my broken glass float. But what's the joke? Well actually, the joke was about a drunk, a tortoise and a pie.. I can't admit to actually doing this because the turtles, birds, lizards and frogs were probably protected species - so it never happened. However, had I been cut off by floods in a remote part of the Gulf Country in 1974 I would have been more worried about surviving than about protected species and it would probably have gone something like this.... The method involves building a fire and letting it burn down to coals, as you would to cook a bird or crab, then lay the turtle on its back in the coals. After a while you turn it over and cook the underneath. You keep doing this until you think it's done. I found out a few years later that you can tell he's cooked when the skin shrinks away from the shell at the openings, but at the time I just cooked until it smelled done. Opening the "pie" is interesting. With the turtle upside down you can bash away at the sections between its arm, leg, head and tail holes (with a rock). Lift off the base of the shell and you have turtle soup and meat that looks something like chicken. This technique (would have been) used on freshwater turtles (not tortoises) but the anatomy is similar to the seagoing ones and I imagine it would work on them. I'd have had to be stranded for two weeks and down to a tin of dehydrated onions and some dried macaroni with no idea how long I would have to wait to get out to resort to this. I would have also discovered you can cook birds in their feathers. You peel the skin and remains of the feathers off and pick the meat from the bones. The turtle, however would have tasted more like chicken than birds cooked in their feathers. Th' WOMBAT (I wonder if the NPWS is searching my old campsites...) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:10:55 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Turtle cooking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt I am still uneasy about Gallagher not including "shellfish" in the remains suggesting the castaway had been alive, however when I asked about the turtle remains I didn't specify a number of turtles. It appears there was only one. That would suggest the same site, especially if it was not a large turtle. I'm interested to see how the shell was opened. Whether the entire underside was smashed in or whether the edges were opened. Was the beast cooked in its shell or was it butchered and the meat prepared? Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:11:57 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Noticing Clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt > From Andrew McKenna > > Keep in mind that the clams were not immediately in the area of the fish, > bird, and turtle bones, but were about 10 meters away. Gallagher may not > have realized at first glance that they were possibly related. I don't > think we did. > > Andrew McKenna Aha! I didn't know that. From the discussion and intense interest in the clams I thought the shells had been found near the fire. In fact from Ric's early posting I initially thought there were oyster bones as well.... Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:12:42 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: No NC crew left behind MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kerry Tiller O.K. You convinced me. Thanks for taking the time to explain it all to me, sorting it out more carefully than I did. I was obviously looking for holes in the story that really weren't there. You're, of course, right about the errant comma, the engine room was also on fire. They didn't need ship's power for the radio, by the way, the radio sets would have run on D.C. batteries. Sooo, everybody got off the ship and eight remain unaccounted for. I guess we're back to whether or not circa 1929 Arabs ate clams. Unless, our castaway was one of the missing engineering officers (who may also have known how to open oysters). LTM (who taught me to accept defeat when I'm wrong) Kerry Tiller #2350 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:27:18 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Ludicrous Clams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy Hi, Ric. I believe you asked for suggestions on how better to tie the area Gallagher is describing to the Seven Site area we searched, the various bones there, clams/oysters, etc. This was in response to my (and Tom's observation) that before we start making assumptions about what Gallagher saw and missed at "our" Seven Site we need to feel comfortable that he and we are describing the same site. One thing that comes to mind is our discussion on Na'ia, when you and Tom mentioned that there is a huge gap in our knowledge about the later years of the colony that is still in files waiting to be searched at Hanslope. Also, you both wanted to talk to the remaining survivors of the colony in the Solomons. Maybe its time to turn attention to this work. The meticulous work being done presently may be unnecessary if the answer to the mysteries of the Seven Site is sitting on a shelf or in someone's memory. I understand that TIGHAR's financial condition precludes visits to England and the Solomons, but at least as to England Kenton seems to have established a good working relationship with several individuals there. Perhaps a good compromise is to see if these people could help us. Tom may have connections in the Solomons who could help us out as well. Not the best, but better than nothing. The Solomons work is time sensitive---the knob, clams, oysters and bones are all dead and aren't going anywhere. That's not the case with the remaining survivors. Also, do we plan to clear more of the Seven Site area on the next expedition? If so, we need to come up with a plan to clear a much larger area of land. While I understand that we want to be as meticulous as possible, at this rate of land clearing per expedition cycle we are all going to run out of life before we get a truly significant area cleared. --Chris Kennedy **************************************************************************** From Ric Let me refresh your memory. What I said was, > How would you suggest that we decide whether or not we're at the castaway > campsite found by Gallagher? What would satisfy you? You didn't answer the question. I also don't know where you got the idea that the huge gap in our knowledge about the later years of the colony can be answered by the files at Hanslope. We don't know that. Van and I looked at dozens of files dating from those later years in Tarawa last year. Lots and lots of information, but no reference to the Seven Site except map delineations that identified the area as set aside for or by Gallagher. We're actively trying to establish contact with former residents, not all of whom are in the Solomons. Yes, we'll do more clearing at the Seven Site and I'm open to suggestions about methodologies that are more efficient and archaeologically sound. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:27:56 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Earhart House MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf (#2406) Hi everyone (and especially those living in or around LA), I have discovered a Hollywood map on the internet (Google) and have been trying to locate where the Putnam's used to live. I found Valley Spring Lane Road in North Hollywood without trouble. Is that where Valley Spring Lane should be ? Can anyone who knows the area tell me where exactly AE's house was situated (between which streets) ? Just curious. (I've been to Hollywood three times in my lifetime, next time (?) I'll make a point of seeing that house. LTM (who wants to know everything) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:29:34 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Null #3 Laura & Liz: But seriously... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Z. David Katz writes (edited): "The weakness in saying that 'if the castaway is not Earhart, then SHE must be...' is that a careful reading of the Burns/Jantz analysis does not, in fact, conclude that the bones belonged to a white female.... It ...does little to help advance what happened on Niku to draw conclusions from highly qualified reports such as the Burns/Jantz analysis.... When analyzing such evidence, it is important to examine REASONABLE alternative explanations for the presence of each item." I agree. The conclusion of Burns and Jantz is essentially, "our best guess is that it is a white female." Perhaps I should have used more careful wording, but I did not mean to suggest that we should take it as fact that the castaway is a white female. That is why I chose the phrase "If we accept... the analysis of Jantz and Burns." However, I believe that any reconstruction of the events on Niku, either featuring Earhart or someone else, should start with our best guess interpretation of all the evidence to date, and right now, our best guess is that it is a white female. Starting there, I think it is then perfectly legitimate and beneficial to say, "Okay, but what if this or that is wrong?" and see where it leads us. I certainly have done that in previous posts, and there certainly is a reasonable chance that the Burns and Jantz guess is wrong and that Gallagher misinterpreted the shoe pieces he found. Thus, the Arab crewman reconstruction is worth pursuing further. But any evaluation of the probability of a reconstruction being true must take into account such deviations from the best guess. With the Arab crewman reconstruction not being entirely consistent with the current best guess, it won't take a whole lot of new evidence against it (combined with a lack of new evidence for it) for me to reject it in that null hypothesis kind of way. --Mike Z. from Massachusetts ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:31:45 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: quicksand MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Kelly If NC was under all that stuff, I would suggest that since guano tends to be quite acidic, there would probably be nothing left. Does that sound correct? Regards David **************************************************************************** From Ric No, I don't think so. There were railroad tracks used to haul guano carts in the 1850s that were still there. Guano does not dissolve steel. It just smells like it could. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:34:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Just a Thought MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Kelly You have to be careful when trying to determine a persons religion based on their name. Many of you have probably heard of Tariq Aziz (Iraqi foreign minister) he has a muslim name, but is in fact Christian. There are many Christians around the middle east and for the sake of convenience, they often adopt muslim names. *************************************************************************** From Ric Rumor has it that there are even people who don't have any religion at all. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:44:25 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Birds, Easy to cook? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Kelly From David Kelly One source of information on how castaways survive in that part of the world could be taken from William Bligh's journal which he kept after the infamous mutiny on the Bounty. This gentleman, who was in my opinion unjustly maligned by Fletcher Christians brother and later the 1930's movie, effectively kept his crew alive for several months with very little. Admittedly he had some provisions from the Bounty, but they supplemented their food by things they found along the way including, a large bird and, if memory serves me correctly a turtle. They did have tools though, including a cutlass. *************************************************************************** From Ric Probably our best model for how Europeans marooned on Niku react to the environment is in the excellent record of the Norwich City survivors. They weren't there long enough to get really desperate but even so, the place sure shook them up. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:44:18 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: New document up MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric There's new document up on the TIGHAR website that I think you'll find interesting. http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Harvey_Letter/Harvey1.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:53:09 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Ye Darke and Tragical Historie of Turtle Butchery! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Denise Tom King says: "I've never tried to butcher a turtle, and now that you mention it don't have much idea how I'd go about it." I have butchered a turtle and all I can say is DON'T DO IT! DON'T EVER DO IT!I killed one once simply because it swam in front of me while I was diving with a loaded speargun, completely forgetting that turtles mate for life, and without noticing that this particular turtle was swimming as one of a pair. It was a beautiful hit, from underneath, straight into the breastplate. I felt so proud until the second turtle swam into view and circled me desperately. The horror, the horror! I immediately pulled the spear out ... but ... And it gets worse: The Remaining One chased our boat back to shore, and then swam around and around us as we unloaded The Dead One from our dinghy. And then it lurked around the wharf for several weeks, getting progressively weaker until it eventually died. It was horrible, horrible, horrible and the feelings of guilt were almost unbearable. As for hacking up The Dead One, however, well, we did it with a knife through the breastplate. That was also yucky because the flesh continued to pulse for ages (the guilt, the guilt!) even after we'd diced it into little pieces and put it into a pressure cooker in a lolo (coconut milk with a touch of chili). When cooked the flesh was green and it oozed a rather unsavoury-looking green slimy oil. And I'm convinced it continued to pulse and twitch even on the plate - although that could just have been my conscience. Mmmm, yes, well ... recalling this entire episode, it is hardly surprising that the castaway site only shows the remains of one turtle. You'd have to be a completely soul-less bastard to go for a second one! LTM (who strongly believed "you kill it; you eat it!") Denise ************************************************************************** From Ric In 1989 our dive team, with Fijian accomplices, caught a turtle. The butchering process was dutifully videotaped by the dive team leader. I watched it once. Never again. The animal was literally butchered alive - laid on its back and the bottom shell cut away and lifted off exposing the insides. etc. etc. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:55:32 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Bauareke Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Ric said: "It would probably make more sense to you if you saw the video." Hey, hey, hey! I know a pitchman when I hear one. :-) I'll try to send the money off this week. (Is this the tape of you doing a voice-over of "High Flight" or singing the U. S. Air Force anthem?) LTM, who is easily inspired Dennis O. McGee #0149EC **************************************************************************** From Ric Oh, you want THAT one. It's a lot more expensive. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:57:17 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: No feathers? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee The discussion on the bird bones left me to wondering why there are no feathers also at the site. If I remember my high school biology correctly, aren't feathers, hair, (finger/toe) nails made of the same basic material? I've seen lots of long-dead animals in the woods and there were often tuffs of hairs or feathers around the site. Similarly with humans -- many of those mummies from ancient Egypt still have hair and finger nails. My point is hair, nails, feathers are very slow to decompose. If I found bird bones I would not be a bit surprised to also find feathers -- but we don't. Just curious. LTM, who's adores feather boas Dennis O. McGee #0149EC **************************************************************************** From Ric According to one account (Herb Moffit) there were feathers present at the site in 1944. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:59:24 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Off Topic - High and Mighty MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary Fajack I remember a number of people expressing interest in the video High and the Mighty. I was able to find the video at the following website: http://members.tripod.com/classic-movies/ This is not a studio release of the video. The company copies the movies from various sources and sells only the "video tape and recording service" not the movie. The quality of the movie was good, but not first rate. I also picked up the old classic "Hell Divers"($12). The quality of this film was good, better than High and the Mighty ($15). Gary Fajack garyfajack@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:19:33 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Earhart search map MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Ric, I was interested to see the search map on E-bay. Is this map already in the public domain? I was also interested to note that it seems to include a (search?) area between the equator and 2S and from 176W - 178W approx. The Lambrecht map does not cover this area. Can you shed any light on this? I was also interested to note that it appears to show a distance from Gardner to the equator, although not for any other island. Was the significance of 281 perhaps appreciated even then? Regards Angus ************************************************************************* From Ric I don;t know if it's in the public domain but the area you mention was coverd by Itasca just before she headed for the Gilberts. The noted distance between the equator and Gardner is interesting. There is no mention in the literature of a possible connection with the "281" message. I wonder if the distance noted is merely the point farthest south that the Colorado reached. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:31:15 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: News from Ludolph MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Ric said, On early sextants the drum was made of ivory and on > post-war sextants they are plastic. What they were made of in the early 20th > century is not known. Do we consider the pensacola sextant "an early sextant" or will it give an indication of what the drum was made in the early 20th century as it is dated 1919 (from memory)? ************************************************************************** From Ric I don't see anything on the Pensacola Ludolph that looks at all like our knob. We'll have to wait and see what the photos that the company is sending show. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:36:19 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: News from Ludolph MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Ric, Since the records were destroyed in the war, how did they know what number to re-commence production at? Or did that old wizened craftsman Willy Baumwolle remember that the last one he made fifteen years before was 3561? I doubt Willy's memory was that good. Perhaps he just guessed as he knew they were well into the 3000 series. Regards Angus *************************************************************************** From Ric The company says, " We obviously have no idea why this number was chosen but we assume 3562 was arrived at from another record book which no longer exists." 1952 was forty years ago and they're just now getting around to trying to reconstruct the company's history. It's certainly possible - even likely - that more records were around then than are availble now. They're still going through old boxes. More records could still turn up. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:38:04 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: News from Ludolph MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Carol Linn Dow Richard, I don't know if I'm reading your Email correctly. How can Ludolph stay in business producing such a small number of sextants? They must have been producing something else besides sextants unless it was a "garage" or a basement hobby shop operation (which it could have been). Jahol? Carol Dow *************************************************************************** From Ric Ludolph made, and makes, a wide range of precision instruments. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:38:50 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: News from Ludolph MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alexander This is interesting stuff... I too am waiting for a reply from the company who made their parachutes and expect to hear from the spokeswoman in a week or two as she is on vacation (ENG: HOLIDAY !) at the moment. I also hope to have good news... Maybe 2002 is the year RIC ! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:40:57 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: food preparation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Dave Bush said: "In AE's "era" there weren't nearly as many butcher shops as today, and many people, even living in small to midsize towns . . ." I would have to disagree with that statement. I was raised in a small town in Iowa in the 50s and 60s and my father was a butcher. Butcher shops were quite common and numerous because the "city" folk had no